docs: fix locations of several documents that got moved

The previous patch renamed several files that are cross-referenced
along the Kernel documentation. Adjust the links to point to
the right places.

Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@s-opensource.com>
diff --git a/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.txt b/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.txt
index 0fe1c6e..cdebc5c 100644
--- a/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.txt
+++ b/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.txt
@@ -136,14 +136,14 @@
 
 Q: I see a network patch and I think it should be backported to stable.
    Should I request it via "stable@vger.kernel.org" like the references in
-   the kernel's Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt file say?
+   the kernel's Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst file say?
 
 A: No, not for networking.  Check the stable queues as per above 1st to see
    if it is already queued.  If not, then send a mail to netdev, listing
    the upstream commit ID and why you think it should be a stable candidate.
 
    Before you jump to go do the above, do note that the normal stable rules
-   in Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt still apply.  So you need to
+   in Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst still apply.  So you need to
    explicitly indicate why it is a critical fix and exactly what users are
    impacted.  In addition, you need to convince yourself that you _really_
    think it has been overlooked, vs. having been considered and rejected.
@@ -165,7 +165,7 @@
 
    If you think there is some valid information relating to it being in
    stable that does _not_ belong in the commit log, then use the three
-   dash marker line as described in Documentation/SubmittingPatches to
+   dash marker line as described in Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst to
    temporarily embed that information into the patch that you send.
 
 Q: Someone said that the comment style and coding convention is different
@@ -220,5 +220,5 @@
    If it is your first patch, mail it to yourself so you can test apply
    it to an unpatched tree to confirm infrastructure didn't mangle it.
 
-   Finally, go back and read Documentation/SubmittingPatches to be
+   Finally, go back and read Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst to be
    sure you are not repeating some common mistake documented there.